DUST Search - Forges are not OP, proto tanks, and the anti-QQ threads

Delta 749 wrote:

Actually use a swarm launcher for an extended time and tell me its easy to use, tracking on it is broken and locks on targets outside or on the edge of the reticule rather than whats dead center, the missiles themselves track to the bottom of the vehicle so even minor bumps will stop them unless you fire from a significant height, rate of fire is slower than a forge gun as well since you can not bring your reticle back up to even start the lock on process again until several seconds have passed oh and did I mention this limitation even extends to reloading
As for damage remember you will need to get through a vehicles shields first and the swarm launcher does a pitiful amount of damage to shields so you will likely use up a clip just to bring them down and get to experience that wonderful delay before reloading and then the time it takes to lock on again

Tsch, some people, they think just because a weapon locks its easy mode and never consider the plethora of problems it has that defeats that perk


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 507	Posted - 2013.06.17 08:23:00 - [1] - Quote Okay, I'm a tanker, and probably one of the better ones. Are vehicles horribly underpowered- no; I manage to go 25:0 in pubs and 12:0 in PC most of the time, unless I'm stuck dealing with other tanks. Is AV OP- For the most part, I'm gonna have to say no on that one. Sure, AV nades punch well above their ISK cost and perhaps need a price increase of 400%, but their limited range is a huge weakness. If I run scanners and put a buffer of infantry between me and the enemy, I never get hit with them. And forge guns, though quite powerful, are pretty hard to use. I urge any tanker to try and hit something with them. Are they very, very powerful compared to turrets- probably, but when you consider you can snipe them from 600m away with a OHK, and they need to be 300m away in a slow suit, it evens out. Swarms are rather stupid in my opinion because they require zero skill to use and completely wreck armor tanks. They might be the only ones that need a damage reduction of perhaps 15%- why they got the 10% if beyond me, in the first place. The biggest problems with tanks are: Targets not rendering past 300m; my rail can do twice that, but my eyes can't. A lack of ADV and PRO tanks to counter the huge amount of damage that PRO AV does- I've been hit by swarms that did 9860 damage (I saw it on the screen after I blew up), 3 AV grenades in a moment that do 6000 damage (not including armor bonus dmg), and proto breaches (which have a dps comparable to rails last build with 3 dmg mods and maxed out skills). We need these ADV and PRO HAVs to defend against the AV, and AV CANNOT GET A BUFF when they are introduced, or tanks become even more of an SP and ISK sink. AV needs to stay the way it is before and after we get pro and ADv tanks. *An imbalance between armor and shield in tank on tank combat (I'm sure you've all seen the threads) If I had any say in it, new tanks would be as such: STD LVL: type 1) high dmg and acceleration, but low HP type 2) high dmg and high hp, but low accleration type 3) high hp and acceleration, but low dmg ADV type 1) high dmg and acceleration, but low HP type 2) high dmg and high hp, but low accleration type 3) high hp and acceleration, but low dmg PRO type 1) high dmg and acceleration, but low HP type 2) high dmg and high hp, but low accleration type 3) high hp and acceleration, but low dmg OFFICER -god mode- (notice how none of the above favor glass cannons, and all have an inherent weakness to exploit, as the weaknesses are very exaggerated- a 28% reduction to that specifc stat, while the other two get a 16% buff) Now, every race would take into account their personal flavors. For instance, a minmitar type 1 tank, would be fast than a minmitar type 2, but a minmitar type 2, would not be fast than an amarr or caldari type 1. Scaling up every level, tanks would increase base HP by 350 points, and get another high and low slot, so if a STD LVL tank has 5 high, 2 low, an ADV would have 6 high, 3 low; PRO would be 7 high, 4 low. The base HP raise is so low, because it provides more ability to customize, as one could stack 7 damage mods on a tank, but they would have around 3000 HP. I could also have a tank with a top speed of 50mph if nano-fibers were re-introduced. This idea is so great because a proto tanks does not necessarily have to be the death-machine than just sits somewhere- it can be anything! Char likes customization and brainstorming.
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 509	Posted - 2013.06.17 09:03:00 - [2] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Golda Go wrote: Stupidest suggestion I've ever seen. No one will play as type 1/3. type 1/3 are interesting. i'm sure someone can take advantage of them. Not for anti-infantry. Any tank turret wrecks infantry, so adding on that extra armor is pretty easy with smaller turrets.
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 509	Posted - 2013.06.17 09:05:00 - [3] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Actually use a swarm launcher for an extended time and tell me its easy to use, tracking on it is broken and locks on targets outside or on the edge of the reticule rather than whats dead center, the missiles themselves track to the bottom of the vehicle so even minor bumps will stop them unless you fire from a significant height, rate of fire is slower than a forge gun as well since you can not bring your reticle back up to even start the lock on process again until several seconds have passed oh and did I mention this limitation even extends to reloading As for damage remember you will need to get through a vehicles shields first and the swarm launcher does a pitiful amount of damage to shields so you will likely use up a clip just to bring them down and get to experience that wonderful delay before reloading and then the time it takes to lock on again Tsch, some people, they think just because a weapon locks its easy mode and never consider the plethora of problems it has that defeats that perk The weapon makes 180 degree turns mid-flight. 60 degree...yeah sure I can see that, but anything more than 90 degrees is physically impossible to do in the space of 0.25m.
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 513	Posted - 2013.06.17 10:40:00 - [4] - Quote Arkena Wyrnspire wrote: Now, see, this is an example of a sane thread from someone who knows what they're talking about. +1. I agree with pretty much all of your points here. What do you think of the engineering skill and it not giving 5% PG per level? Well, it's hard to say, right now, without the higher tiered tanks. More than anything, what it does is compress the SP gap between old and new tankers, but the Old Guard are still wrecking the newer tankers at every turn. CCP needs to accept that the experienced tankers will always win against new ones, whether they have significantly better passive skills or not. For example, I have >11 mil SP, but i have only invested 6.5, and that is spread equally across caldari havs, gallente havs, and caldari LLAVs, and even against tankers who dropped 8, 9, 10 and upward into their skills, I'm still winning almost all of those battles. Even against really good tankers who specialized into one variety, it'll end up as a stalemate because the passive skills mean nothing, right now. So to answer your question, I'm gonna say yes, I want the old engineering skill back, but not because of the AV/Tank balance, but because of the non-existent SP gap between new and old tankers. On the subject of passive damage skills, it works really nicely with tank on tank combat, as it's not call of duty mixed with world of tanks anymore, but much more fun and closer to what the infantry do (low dps, high hp). Perhaps, a better alternative would be turret-specific bonuses. Like, for missiles, increasing missiles/volley, reload time, splash, and velocity. For hybrid: cool down reduction, range, zoom, and increased RoF. Adding capacitors to vehicles would definitely increase the depth of vehicle combat, as managing capacitor use in eve is an integral part of fighting.
Charlotte O'Dell Molon Labe. League of Infamy 518	Posted - 2013.06.17 13:09:00 - [5] - Quote Alan-Ibn-Xuan Al-Alasabe wrote: Charlotte O'Dell wrote: Adding capacitors to vehicles would definitely increase the depth of vehicle combat, as managing capacitor use in eve is an integral part of fighting. This is the elephant in the room, right here. Almost any balance discussion wrt vehicles is pretty irrelevant until vehicle capacitor is implemented. The changes to vehicle gameplay will just be too drastic. I'm scared :( If this is included, I better be able to remove blueberries from my turrets because ill be damned if they drain my capacitor by shooting at the mcc. This also might give missiles the boost they need, and knock blasters and rails down a peg. Still, it could go either way as beneficial or not for tanks, and vehicles in general- especially if theyre linked to mobility.